Skip to main content
Glama

getSupportedFormats

Lists compatible video formats and codecs for editing operations in the Video Clip MCP server, helping users prepare files for clipping, merging, or splitting.

Instructions

获取支持的视频格式和编码

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that implements the core logic of the getSupportedFormats tool. It constructs a result object containing arrays of supported video formats, codecs, and audio codecs by using Object.values on the respective enums, then returns it wrapped in the MCP response format as JSON text.
    private async handleGetSupportedFormats() {
      const result: MCPToolResults['getSupportedFormats'] = {
        videoFormats: Object.values(VideoFormat),
        videoCodecs: Object.values(VideoCodec),
        audioCodecs: Object.values(AudioCodec)
      };
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Registration of the getSupportedFormats tool in the list returned by ListToolsRequestHandler. Defines the tool name, description, and input schema (empty object since no parameters are required).
    {
      name: 'getSupportedFormats',
      description: '获取支持的视频格式和编码',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {}
      }
    },
  • TypeScript interface definition for the output result of the getSupportedFormats tool in MCPToolResults.
    getSupportedFormats: {
      videoFormats: string[];
      videoCodecs: string[];
      audioCodecs: string[];
    };
  • TypeScript type definition for the input parameters of the getSupportedFormats tool in MCPToolParams, indicating no parameters are required.
    getSupportedFormats: Record<string, never>;
  • Dispatch case in the CallToolRequestHandler switch statement that routes calls to the getSupportedFormats handler.
    case 'getSupportedFormats':
      return await this.handleGetSupportedFormats();
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does ('获取支持的视频格式和编码') without adding any context about traits like whether it's a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, rate limits, or what the return format might be. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence: '获取支持的视频格式和编码'. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, has zero wasted words, and is appropriately sized for a simple tool. Every part of the sentence earns its place by clearly stating the action and resource.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete enough to convey the basic purpose. However, it lacks details on behavioral traits and usage guidelines, which are needed for full context. Since there's no output schema, the description doesn't explain return values, but that's acceptable given the tool's straightforward nature.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has 0 parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100% (as there are no parameters to describe). The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, so it meets the baseline expectation. No additional information is required or provided, which is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: '获取支持的视频格式和编码' (Get supported video formats and encodings). It specifies the verb '获取' (get) and the resource '支持的视频格式和编码' (supported video formats and encodings), making the intent unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'getVideoInfo', which might also provide format-related information, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, such as whether it should be used before processing videos or as a reference for other tools like 'clipVideo' or 'mergeVideos'. Without such information, users must infer usage from the purpose alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/pickstar-2002/video-clip-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server